Here's a question - we get a penalty in added time which would win us the game. We have both Kane and Toney on the pitch. So who takes it?
For the record, Kane has scored 70 out of 81 penalties (86%) whereas Toney has scored 30 out of 32 (94%). For further context, 6 of Kane's 11 misses have come when playing for England and one of Toney's two misses came over 5 year ago,
Here's a question - we get a penalty in added time which would win us the game. We have both Kane and Toney on the pitch. So who takes it?
For the record, Kane has scored 70 out of 81 penalties (86%) whereas Toney has scored 30 out of 32 (94%). For further context, 6 of Kane's 11 misses have come when playing for England and one of Toney's two misses came over 5 year ago,
If it is an important game, I don't think it matters who takes it, we will probably miss it!
Here's a question - we get a penalty in added time which would win us the game. We have both Kane and Toney on the pitch. So who takes it?
For the record, Kane has scored 70 out of 81 penalties (86%) whereas Toney has scored 30 out of 32 (94%). For further context, 6 of Kane's 11 misses have come when playing for England and one of Toney's two misses came over 5 year ago,
An understandable point but Kane takes it all day long, Toney has never taken a pressure pen like Kane has.
Here's a question - we get a penalty in added time which would win us the game. We have both Kane and Toney on the pitch. So who takes it?
For the record, Kane has scored 70 out of 81 penalties (86%) whereas Toney has scored 30 out of 32 (94%). For further context, 6 of Kane's 11 misses have come when playing for England and one of Toney's two misses came over 5 year ago,
An understandable point but Kane takes it all day long, Toney has never taken a pressure pen like Kane has.
Kane takes the ball out of Toney's hands. Nine England players prevent Toney trying to get it back again.
Here's a question - we get a penalty in added time which would win us the game. We have both Kane and Toney on the pitch. So who takes it?
For the record, Kane has scored 70 out of 81 penalties (86%) whereas Toney has scored 30 out of 32 (94%). For further context, 6 of Kane's 11 misses have come when playing for England and one of Toney's two misses came over 5 year ago,
An understandable point but Kane takes it all day long, Toney has never taken a pressure pen like Kane has.
Kane takes the ball out of Toney's hands. Nine England players prevent Toney trying to get it back again.
For the euros I think it’s a straightforward starting eleven:
Pickford Walker Stones Maguire Shaw Rice Mainoo Bellingham Saka Foden Kane
That’s about right but doesn’t anyone else think that we’d be better with Walker replacing Maguire in the centre, and playing Trippier on the right? I think that would be a great back four.
Genuinely could have fallen asleep. Foden and Bellingham are sublime though, both have to start.
Belgiums second goal was class, unreal delivery by Lukaku, truly exquisite.
Two home games against two sides in a massive transitional period and we couldn't get a win. We aren't really better than either of them and I think we should be when you look at the squads.
alternative take; we just played 2 of the top 5 or 6 teams in the world. We competed with them both without our best player
Strange how you can get a totally different perspective being there and then watching it back on TV.
My feeling in the ground was that it was a bang average performance and we looked really poor defensively. Also wasn't getting the love for Mainoo. Felt he was solid but not spectacular.
Watched it back this morning and no change in the defensive opinion, but they played pretty well and really should have won comfortably. Mainoo looked far better as well.
Suspect the appalling atmosphere and generally feeling unwell ditatached me a bit in the ground.
For the euros I think it’s a straightforward starting eleven:
Pickford Walker Stones Maguire Shaw Rice Mainoo Bellingham Saka Foden Kane
That’s about right but doesn’t anyone else think that we’d be better with Walker replacing Maguire in the centre, and playing Trippier on the right? I think that would be a great back four.
Has Walker played CB in a back 4 before? Back 3 yes but not sure about a back 4.
Big risk to try it out for the first time in a major tournament.
Centre back definitely feels like our weak spot (left back too if Shaw is injured), and I think Maguire is an accident waiting to happen against big teams, but there's no ready made replacement and I can't see Southgate starting anyone but him and Stones.
I think we have a problem defending movement and pace. Some opponents offer more of that than others. Maguire should not be starting. Who replaces him is more of a problem. Man City sucessfully played Stones on midfield to solve a problem but England haven't got the players to play behind him so that won't help. Jordan Henderson played centre half for Liverpool with mixed results but at international level you might get away with it, but Henderson is a bit past it. I'm not a fan of Southgate but it isn't an easy problem to solve with what he has available.
Genuinely could have fallen asleep. Foden and Bellingham are sublime though, both have to start.
Belgiums second goal was class, unreal delivery by Lukaku, truly exquisite.
Two home games against two sides in a massive transitional period and we couldn't get a win. We aren't really better than either of them and I think we should be when you look at the squads.
alternative take; we just played 2 of the top 5 or 6 teams in the world. We competed with them both without our best player
That is another way of looking at it, but we are ranked 3rd and ahead of both of Belgium (4th) and Brazil (5th). On paper we are currently expected to beat both by rank and bookies odds. Of course games aren't won like that or bookies would be out of business.
In regards to squad strength, we may have been missing Kane, but most people would say our squad was better than both teams on the night, especially Belgium, yet we couldn't prove it.
Friendlys aren't the be all end all and will always just be a run out, but, mentality and momentum will always play a part in football, and putting sides like that to the sword sends a message to other teams and will effect their mindsets before they even kick off against us. Right now we are still bottle job England, no one takes us seriously and that mindset will creep into minds of the players who play against us.
You start smashing Brazil and Belgium in friendlies, it's a massive boost on a mental level for the players and fans.
If we had a manager like Pep or Klopp for instance, we would have smashed both imo, and people would fear us going into major tournaments. Instead we are just the team that fails when faced with the real challenges every time. That all starts with the manager.
1. I find it embarrassing having a foreign manager.
2. I think they would be unsure what to do without being able to use their bottomless wallet to solve our central defence problem.
3. It is underestimated how much a motivation it is to do it for your own country. Southgate additionally has his penalty miss as a huge motivation. He was there as a player in ’96 and I was there as a spectator. With he as boss the wound can be truly healed. We came so so close last time. Does anyone really think that these foreign managers can really have the passion and desire that they would have if manager of Spain and Germany respectively? Really? I don't believe it.
1. I find it embarrassing having a foreign manager.
2. I think they would be unsure what to do without being able to use their bottomless wallet to solve our central defence problem.
3. It is underestimated how much a motivation it is to do it for your own country. Southgate additionally has his penalty miss as a huge motivation. He was there as a player in ’96 and I was there as a spectator. With he as boss the wound can be truly healed. We came so so close last time. Does anyone really think that these foreign managers can really have the passion and desire that they would have if manager of Spain and Germany respectively? Really? I don't believe it.
To be fair, I'm not saying Southgate is shite to try and be entertaining. It's an England related thread and I'm reflecting on one of the biggest factors around the England squad.
There isn't a central defence problem. We have Stones, Konsa, Gomez and Tomori. Pair one up with Stones and that's one half of a champions league winning centre back pairing. To their right is the champions league winning right back. We have the squad at an international level, that's not the problem.
You say it's embarrassing but I don't think most people would care if the team lifted a trophy.
1. I find it embarrassing having a foreign manager.
2. I think they would be unsure what to do without being able to use their bottomless wallet to solve our central defence problem.
3. It is underestimated how much a motivation it is to do it for your own country. Southgate additionally has his penalty miss as a huge motivation. He was there as a player in ’96 and I was there as a spectator. With he as boss the wound can be truly healed. We came so so close last time. Does anyone really think that these foreign managers can really have the passion and desire that they would have if manager of Spain and Germany respectively? Really? I don't believe it.
To be fair, I'm not saying Southgate is shite to try and be entertaining. It's an England related thread and I'm reflecting on one of the biggest factors around the England squad.
There isn't a central defence problem. We have Stones, Konsa, Gomez and Tomori. Pair one up with Stones and that's one half of a champions league winning centre back pairing. To their right is the champions league winning right back. We have the squad at an international level, that's not the problem.
You say it's embarrassing but I don't think most people would care if the team lifted a trophy.
There definitely is a central defence problem. To point at Stones as one half of a Champions League winning pairing is incredibly reductive. I like Stones a lot but he's famously a risky player in a central two as an out and out centre back. City often play with as many as four centre backs, as they did in the Champions League final. Stones will step up out of RB or CB into the midfield and often be playing on the edge of the opponent's box for City. He's able to do that because he has absolutely outstanding, solid centre backs around him playing wider and deeper and often 5 or 6 of the best players in the world in their position ahead of him. Rodri, De Bruyne, Bernardo and Haaland along with others who are constantly drilled on a weekly basis in a specific, unique way of playing that brings out the best of Stones' skills and mitigates his failings. We just can't play that way with England nor should we try to. Konsa is a good player but he's not world class, Gomez is frankly a bit of a liability at CB, he's much more effective as a full back stepping into midfield. Tomori has been injured this season and Southgate obviously doesn't rate him for some reason. We have real problems at left back as well with Shaw injured, Chilwell likely to be injured before long and very little else. Our balance there is really poor and it was very noticeable in the two friendlies how easily exposed we were on the counter and how much we rely on Walker's recovery pace to get us out of trouble when we are caught out. The personnel we have available are decent but there's definitely issues there and I think if Southgate has decided to make us more expansive we'll feel the negatives against teams who are good in transition. We always overrate our players and then are shocked when they're exposed by world class ones
1. I find it embarrassing having a foreign manager.
2. I think they would be unsure what to do without being able to use their bottomless wallet to solve our central defence problem.
3. It is underestimated how much a motivation it is to do it for your own country. Southgate additionally has his penalty miss as a huge motivation. He was there as a player in ’96 and I was there as a spectator. With he as boss the wound can be truly healed. We came so so close last time. Does anyone really think that these foreign managers can really have the passion and desire that they would have if manager of Spain and Germany respectively? Really? I don't believe it.
To be fair, I'm not saying Southgate is shite to try and be entertaining. It's an England related thread and I'm reflecting on one of the biggest factors around the England squad.
There isn't a central defence problem. We have Stones, Konsa, Gomez and Tomori. Pair one up with Stones and that's one half of a champions league winning centre back pairing. To their right is the champions league winning right back. We have the squad at an international level, that's not the problem.
You say it's embarrassing but I don't think most people would care if the team lifted a trophy.
There definitely is a central defence problem. To point at Stones as one half of a Champions League winning pairing is incredibly reductive. I like Stones a lot but he's famously a risky player in a central two as an out and out centre back. City often play with as many as four centre backs, as they did in the Champions League final. Stones will step up out of RB or CB into the midfield and often be playing on the edge of the opponent's box for City. He's able to do that because he has absolutely outstanding, solid centre backs around him playing wider and deeper and often 5 or 6 of the best players in the world in their position ahead of him. Rodri, De Bruyne, Bernardo and Haaland along with others who are constantly drilled on a weekly basis in a specific, unique way of playing that brings out the best of Stones' skills and mitigates his failings. We just can't play that way with England nor should we try to. Konsa is a good player but he's not world class, Gomez is frankly a bit of a liability at CB, he's much more effective as a full back stepping into midfield. Tomori has been injured this season and Southgate obviously doesn't rate him for some reason. We have real problems at left back as well with Shaw injured, Chilwell likely to be injured before long and very little else. Our balance there is really poor and it was very noticeable in the two friendlies how easily exposed we were on the counter and how much we rely on Walker's recovery pace to get us out of trouble when we are caught out. The personnel we have available are decent but there's definitely issues there and I think if Southgate has decided to make us more expansive we'll feel the negatives against teams who are good in transition. We always overrate our players and then are shocked when they're exposed by world class ones
Our defence is definitely the biggest issue in this side, but it still should be enough to win a tournament. Nations have done it with worst defences, you play to your other strengths.
You are right about Stones and he is surrounded by elite level players at City. Bit different stepping out from the back with the England back line and the different levels of coaching. He still has experience though of being part of a title winning defence. That should be enough at tournament level football.
This is why Southgate should be playing a more attacking style and giving players more freedom where that's our strength. When you have the options of Foden, Bellingham, Kane, Saka, Maddison, Palmer, Rashford, Watkins, Gordon etc, we should be scoring at least 2-3 goals a game or at least creating enough chances to. Instead he will play it safe and that's why we won't win. A good coach would recognise we are quite top heavy and utilise that, you just know he will play 5-6 defensive minded players as he has always done.
We have a central defence issue in the sense that it's not one of the better ones on an international stage, but that's international football for you, very rare a team is perfect.
1. I find it embarrassing having a foreign manager.
2. I think they would be unsure what to do without being able to use their bottomless wallet to solve our central defence problem.
3. It is underestimated how much a motivation it is to do it for your own country. Southgate additionally has his penalty miss as a huge motivation. He was there as a player in ’96 and I was there as a spectator. With he as boss the wound can be truly healed. We came so so close last time. Does anyone really think that these foreign managers can really have the passion and desire that they would have if manager of Spain and Germany respectively? Really? I don't believe it.
To be fair, I'm not saying Southgate is shite to try and be entertaining. It's an England related thread and I'm reflecting on one of the biggest factors around the England squad.
There isn't a central defence problem. We have Stones, Konsa, Gomez and Tomori. Pair one up with Stones and that's one half of a champions league winning centre back pairing. To their right is the champions league winning right back. We have the squad at an international level, that's not the problem.
You say it's embarrassing but I don't think most people would care if the team lifted a trophy.
There definitely is a central defence problem. To point at Stones as one half of a Champions League winning pairing is incredibly reductive. I like Stones a lot but he's famously a risky player in a central two as an out and out centre back. City often play with as many as four centre backs, as they did in the Champions League final. Stones will step up out of RB or CB into the midfield and often be playing on the edge of the opponent's box for City. He's able to do that because he has absolutely outstanding, solid centre backs around him playing wider and deeper and often 5 or 6 of the best players in the world in their position ahead of him. Rodri, De Bruyne, Bernardo and Haaland along with others who are constantly drilled on a weekly basis in a specific, unique way of playing that brings out the best of Stones' skills and mitigates his failings. We just can't play that way with England nor should we try to. Konsa is a good player but he's not world class, Gomez is frankly a bit of a liability at CB, he's much more effective as a full back stepping into midfield. Tomori has been injured this season and Southgate obviously doesn't rate him for some reason. We have real problems at left back as well with Shaw injured, Chilwell likely to be injured before long and very little else. Our balance there is really poor and it was very noticeable in the two friendlies how easily exposed we were on the counter and how much we rely on Walker's recovery pace to get us out of trouble when we are caught out. The personnel we have available are decent but there's definitely issues there and I think if Southgate has decided to make us more expansive we'll feel the negatives against teams who are good in transition. We always overrate our players and then are shocked when they're exposed by world class ones
Our defence is definitely the biggest issue in this side, but it still should be enough to win a tournament. Nations have done it with worst defences, you play to your other strengths.
You are right about Stones and he is surrounded by elite level players at City. Bit different stepping out from the back with the England back line and the different levels of coaching. He still has experience though of being part of a title winning defence. That should be enough at tournament level football.
This is why Southgate should be playing a more attacking style and giving players more freedom where that's our strength. When you have the options of Foden, Bellingham, Kane, Saka, Maddison, Palmer, Rashford, Watkins, Gordon etc, we should be scoring at least 2-3 goals a game or at least creating enough chances to. Instead he will play it safe and that's why we won't win. A good coach would recognise we are quite top heavy and utilise that, you just know he will play 5-6 defensive minded players as he has always done.
We have a central defence issue in the sense that it's not one of the better ones on an international stage, but that's international football for you, very rare a team is perfect.
No, that's the exact opposite of what a good coach would do. You don't get anywhere trying to be a score one more team, you end up like Peterborough who do alright at a crap level and then are absolutely murdered by teams who actually have a decent structure. Take France for example: they have been to the last two World Cup finals, and they did it with a legendarily defensive unexpansive manager. In the 2018 final against Croatia they started with an attacking left full back and a very defensively stable right back who plays as much at CB as he does RB. They had the best holding midfielder in the world alongside Pogba, Giroud up front despite him not being able to score goals because he keeps the ball away from their own goal as well and balanced Mbappe playing on one wing with Matuidi on the other, who is a semi-versatile deep central midfielder. In the 2022 final he set up similarly with Kounde, another RB/CB offsetting Hernandez at LB and two more aggressive wingers offset by Tchouameni and Rabiot as dual holders. Giroud up top again. They lost to an Argentina side that basically had a plan of 'give it to Messi and kick anyone who isn't Messi'. It wasn't champagne stuff and it went to penalties.
We of course got to the 2020 final playing our way and took Italy to penalties. Italy were a bit more fun against rubbish teams but as soon as they got through the groups they went full tortoise and won one game in regular time. Barella and Verratti, two heroes of workrate and kicking people protecting Jorginho so he could try and spread the ball around in front of two absolute grizzled bastards in Chiellini and Bonucci, two of the best to ever do it. It being physically dominate their space and make life miserable for attackers as opposed to being elegant footballers. All workate, control and niggling out of possession. Going back one more our mates France also got to the 2016 Euros final where they lost to a Portugal team so regressive they made Deschamps look like Klopp on steroids. France set up in a 442 with Griezmann off Giroud, Matuidi (left winger two years later) holding alongside Pogba and the typically box-to-box midfielder Sissoko on the right so Payet could do Payet things on the left. Portugal's plan was that Ronaldo would save them so he played up front with Nani and four centre mids behind him. It was horrible. When Ronaldo had to be subbed after 25 minutes they brought on Quaresma so now they had two wingers up front two try and counter attack while stodging up the pitch. It was really depressing and then they won when a pot-shot from Eder (0 goals in 13 Premier League games for Swansea) went in in extra time. Which admittedly was very funny.
Winners don't get there being shining examples of attacking play, the last four tournaments we have watched the most organised teams misery their way to finals against often equally miserable teams and then it's been decided usually by penalties or the odd goal. The teams who get to the end are the teams that don't lose, and that comes from being solid and organised not beautifully expansive. But maybe all the past World Cup and Euros winning managers got it wrong, I dunno.
Comments
For the record, Kane has scored 70 out of 81 penalties (86%) whereas Toney has scored 30 out of 32 (94%). For further context, 6 of Kane's 11 misses have come when playing for England and one of Toney's two misses came over 5 year ago,
My feeling in the ground was that it was a bang average performance and we looked really poor defensively. Also wasn't getting the love for Mainoo. Felt he was solid but not spectacular.
Watched it back this morning and no change in the defensive opinion, but they played pretty well and really should have won comfortably. Mainoo looked far better as well.
Suspect the appalling atmosphere and generally feeling unwell ditatached me a bit in the ground.
Big risk to try it out for the first time in a major tournament.
Centre back definitely feels like our weak spot (left back too if Shaw is injured), and I think Maguire is an accident waiting to happen against big teams, but there's no ready made replacement and I can't see Southgate starting anyone but him and Stones.
In regards to squad strength, we may have been missing Kane, but most people would say our squad was better than both teams on the night, especially Belgium, yet we couldn't prove it.
Friendlys aren't the be all end all and will always just be a run out, but, mentality and momentum will always play a part in football, and putting sides like that to the sword sends a message to other teams and will effect their mindsets before they even kick off against us. Right now we are still bottle job England, no one takes us seriously and that mindset will creep into minds of the players who play against us.
You start smashing Brazil and Belgium in friendlies, it's a massive boost on a mental level for the players and fans.
If we had a manager like Pep or Klopp for instance, we would have smashed both imo, and people would fear us going into major tournaments. Instead we are just the team that fails when faced with the real challenges every time. That all starts with the manager.
I wouldn't want Guardiola or Klopp because:
1. I find it embarrassing having a foreign manager.
2. I think they would be unsure what to do without being able to use their bottomless wallet to solve our central defence problem.
3. It is underestimated how much a motivation it is to do it for your own country. Southgate additionally has his penalty miss as a huge motivation.
He was there as a player in ’96 and I was there as a spectator. With he as boss the wound can be truly healed. We came so so close last time.
Does anyone really think that these foreign managers can really have the passion and desire that they would have if manager of Spain and Germany respectively? Really? I don't believe it.
There isn't a central defence problem. We have Stones, Konsa, Gomez and Tomori. Pair one up with Stones and that's one half of a champions league winning centre back pairing. To their right is the champions league winning right back. We have the squad at an international level, that's not the problem.
You say it's embarrassing but I don't think most people would care if the team lifted a trophy.
You are right about Stones and he is surrounded by elite level players at City. Bit different stepping out from the back with the England back line and the different levels of coaching. He still has experience though of being part of a title winning defence. That should be enough at tournament level football.
This is why Southgate should be playing a more attacking style and giving players more freedom where that's our strength. When you have the options of Foden, Bellingham, Kane, Saka, Maddison, Palmer, Rashford, Watkins, Gordon etc, we should be scoring at least 2-3 goals a game or at least creating enough chances to. Instead he will play it safe and that's why we won't win. A good coach would recognise we are quite top heavy and utilise that, you just know he will play 5-6 defensive minded players as he has always done.
We have a central defence issue in the sense that it's not one of the better ones on an international stage, but that's international football for you, very rare a team is perfect.